But, like many things Wisconsin, the more I dwell on it, the more it grows on me… here’s an excerpt from the Wisconsin State Journal (thanks to Brian @Wisconomy for the link) that reflects on how Governor Jim Doyle explained the positioning that accompanies the new branding:

Gov. Jim Doyle is scheduled Monday to introduce the “Live Like You Mean It” logo and theme line at the Wisconsin Governor’s Conference on Tourism in La Crosse.

The marketing strategy is designed to distinguish the state from its competitors, not only in tourism but in commerce, agriculture and other sectors, leaders say.

“This is another tool we’ll use to keep loyal visitors coming back, communicate why a business should relocate or expand here, and let talented employees know why they should choose Wisconsin,” Doyle said.

The color selections for the logo, designed by Red Brown Kle, a Milwaukee advertising and communications company, came from consumer research conducted last year in Wisconsin and neighboring states. The green hue of the word “Wisconsin” is designed to represent the state’s natural resources and stewardship of the land. The red in the theme line and the cartwheeling silhouette conveys the attitudes of the state’s people, Doyle said.

Figures for 2008 won’t be released until May, but tourism was a $13 billion industry in Wisconsin in 2007. The state used $50,000 of the Department of Tourism’s $10 million marketing budget to come up with the logo and theme line.

A year ago, the state unveiled a brand platform on which to create the logo. The platform focused on the state’s culture of original thinkers. The logo will be used in online, print, broadcast and other marketing campaigns.

“The goal here is that by speaking in one voice and presenting a unified image, it helps Wisconsin grow its marketing strength at a time when we need it most,” said Kelli Trumble, state tourism secretary. “It really gives us a very distinct look.”

What do you think? Does this make you want to relocate your business here? It definitely makes me want to bring the kids, which I suppose is the big enchilada in state-versus-state economic development – that is, the attraction of a certain psychographic of entrepreneurial talent driven by quality of life issues. Which, if you’re trying to attract a person like me, would probably work pretty well.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

‘I only got a dollar out of the $20′, declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’

‘Yeah, that’s right’, exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’

‘That’s true!!’shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’

‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

This wonderful illustration of the current tax system in the United States was created by the Dr. David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. who is a Professor of Economics at the University of Georgia. I like his explanation very much.